EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN (enb@igc.apc.org)
PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT (IISD)
WRITTEN AND EDITED BY:
Johannah Bernstein
Anilla Cherian
Langston James Goree VI "Kimo"
Richard Jordan
Lynn Wagner
A DAILY REPORT ON THE THIRD SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY
COMMITTEE FOR THE WORLD SUMMIT FOR SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Vol. 10 No. 26 Tuesday, 17 January 1994
WSSD PREPCOM III HIGHLIGHTS
MONDAY, 16 JANUARY 1995
PLENARY
Amb. Somavi'a (Chile) opened the Plenary with three items
for adoption under Agenda Item 1: adoption of the agenda
(A/CONF.166/PC/24); organization of work
(A/CONF.166/PC/L.24); and observer status for IGOs
(A/CONF.166/PC/L.23). The Chair announced that the Plenary
would be transformed into Working Group I to discuss the
draft Declaration and Chapter V. Amb. Koos Richelle
(Netherlands) will chair WG II, which will discuss chapters
I to IV of the Programme of Action.
The Plenary turned to Agenda Item 2, accreditation of NGOs,
A/CONF.166/PC/11/Add.2 and A/CONF.166/PC/11/Add.3. China
disputed inclusion of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples'
Organization (UNPO). The Chair asked the Secretariat to
examine further documentation on this organization, noting
that the list was provisional. On Agenda Item 3, the status
of preparation for the WSSD (A/CONF.166/PC/25), Nitin Desai
highlighted two October 1994 seminars in Beijing and
Slovenia. The Chair added that more than 90 Heads of State
or Prime Ministers have confirmed their participation at the
Summit. Over 2000 NGOs have been accredited.
WORKING GROUP I
The Chair opened the first session of Working Group I,
calling on delegates to identify areas of convergence and
divergence. The Philippines, on behalf of the G-77 and
China, made a proposal to divide L.22 into two distinct
parts: the Declaration and the draft Programme of Action.
PARAGRAPH 1: (highest priority to social development)
Switzerland, Australia and the US suggested references to
the significance of social development and human well-being
for all, and stressed that they are the highest priorities.
PARAGRAPH 2: (urgent need to address social problems) The
Holy See said the language overstates what the international
community is prepared to do. Japan called for stronger links
between the three themes. Australia, the EU and the US
supported the existing language. PARAGRAPH 3: (need for
effective response) This paragraph was approved with no
amendments. PARAGRAPH 4: (preconditions for peace and
security) The EU added "respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms" after "social justice". PARAGRAPH 5:
(interdependence of social and economic development) The US
proposed the following language: "broad-based and sustained
economic development and equitable social development are
central to economic security and social progress".
Australia, supported by Brazil, India and the US, proposed
the deletion of the last two sentences. PARAGRAPH 6:
(importance of social development) The EU proposed that
economic policies be appreciated in terms of social
progress, and stressed that gender equity be at the center
of economic and social development. The US requested
brackets around the first EU proposal. PARAGRAPH 7:
(government commitment to social development) India and
Algeria added reference to the rights of the poor, the
excluded and the unemployed, to food, work, shelter, health,
education, and information. The US called for brackets
around this proposal. Canada's reference to "exercise
rights, utilize resources and share responsibilities" was
accepted. PARAGRAPH 8: (new era of international
cooperation) The US added, after "cold war", "to promote
social development and social justice". PARAGRAPH 9:
(conviction that progress can be achieved) The Holy See
suggested that world leaders should acknowledge their action
and inaction in contributing to the current situation. The
US noted that it would be too much to ask heads of
government to indict themselves. PARAGRAPH 10: (commitment)
Saudi Arabia suggested adding the word "implementation" in
reference to the Declaration, which remains bracketed.
PARAGRAPH 11: (on progress and poverty) The G-77 and China
suggested replacing "misery" with "poverty". The US proposed
adding the words "throughout the world in both developed and
developing countries" before "unprecedented progress". The
paragraph remains bracketed. PARAGRAPH 12: (globalization)
The G-77 and China proposed some textual amendments
including inserting the word "cultural" before the word
"values". The paragraph remains bracketed. PARAGRAPH 13:
(progress in some areas) The G-77 and China suggested
deleting the word "sevenfold" with regard to the
multiplication of the wealth of nations in 13(a). In 13(b)
(increase in life expectancy), the US suggested reference to
family planning practices. The Holy See added reference to
basic health care. The G-77 and China requested brackets
around these proposals. The Russian Federation called for a
more global reference to average infant mortality. Delegates
agreed to the G-77 proposal to replace sub-paragraph (c)
with: "Democratic pluralism, democratic institutions and
fundamental civil liberties have expanded. De-colonization
efforts have seen much progress, while the elimination of
apartheid has been an historic achievement". The US added a
new sub-paragraph to refer to the decrease in absolute
poverty in percentage terms. India questioned the
justification of the US reference, since the absolute
numbers are what must be brought down. PARAGRAPH 14:
(growing distress) Japan suggested reference to the adverse
impact of expected population growth. In 14(a) (income
gaps), the EU emphasized the growth experienced by some
developing countries, while noting the marginalization of
LDCs. Slovenia called for a reference to the widening gap
between developed and developing countries. The EU accepted
the proposal although the G-77 would only accept it on the
condition that their language regarding unequal structures
was accepted. In 14(b) (problems of transition), Armenia,
Poland, and the Russian Federation sought to retain the
specific reference to countries with economies in
transition. The text remains bracketed. In 14(c) (poverty),
the G-77 and China amendment highlighting the position of
women was accepted. In 14(d) (global unemployment), Norway
proposed a reference to people with disabilities who are
forced into poverty and unemployment, which was included in
a separate sub-paragraph. The EU and US suggested references
to the relationship between women and poverty. In 14(e) (on
vulnerability), the EU proposed reference to environmental
damage and India suggested reference to overconsumption. The
US wanted a reference to the disabled and elderly. Mexico
called for inclusion of minorities and indigenous peoples.
PARAGRAPH 15: (developing countries) The Chair recommended
that 14(b) be specific to countries in transition and that
paragraph 15 include a broader reference to countries
undergoing socio-economic changes. PARAGRAPH 16: (social
distress) The US added "violence, particularly against women
and children" to the list of sources of social distress. The
G-77 and China added: chronic hunger and malnutrition,
illicit arms trafficking and xenophobia. PARAGRAPH 17:
(offenses to human dignity) India said that people cannot be
subordinate to markets. PARAGRAPH 18: (people-centered
framework) The G-77 and China, supported by Mexico,
suggested replacing "framework" with "approach". The Chair
recommended that the amendments be accepted ad referendum.
WORKING GROUP II
Working Group II, began negotiating on a paragraph-by-
paragraph basis. Due to the time constraints they reverted
to proposing amendments. After lunch, the Chair commented on
the unproductive nature of this process and appealed to the
delegates to submit written comments by Tuesday. Benin
proposed an ad hoc, 7-member working group to review this
Prep Com's work on January 27, to ensure proper translation
for the Summit. PARAGRAPH 1: (introduction) Switzerland
suggested presenting the purpose of social development.
China countered that the draft Declaration does this.
PARAGRAPH 2: (recommended actions) Iran, supported by
Malaysia, questioned whether "favorable environment" refers
to either national or international levels. The EU said that
duties of all actors should be included. Switzerland
suggested adding health to the list of basic needs. The US
proposed incorporating environmental concerns into economic
and social policies.
PARAGRAPH 3: (relationship to other conferences) The US
called for reference to the concept of food security and
nutrition. Kuwait, supported by Egypt, suggested that
implementation should be compatible with national laws.
PARAGRAPH 4: (social development linkages) The Holy See
proposed reference to the spiritual aspect of social
development. The EU called for reference to the ICPD.
PARAGRAPH 5: (interdependence and cooperation) The G-77
called for a reference to the severe food crisis. PARAGRAPH
6: (market forces and national policies) Norway stated that
public policies are necessary to supplement market
mechanisms and to protect social security. Canada added that
public policies should correct environmentally destructive
market failures. PARAGRAPH 7: (social development) The EU
called for a partnership between men and women including
man's full responsibility in family life.
PARAGRAPH 8: (aspects of an enabling environment) The EU and
South Africa emphasized access to productive resources. The
G-77 and China, supported by the Holy See, called for
strengthening the role of the family. Canada noted the
importance of a people-centered approach to development.
PARAGRAPH 9: (trade employment and incomes) The G-77
proposed a new sub- paragraph calling for an open,
equitable, cooperative and mutually beneficial international
economic environment. The US objected. Algeria said that the
G-77 language was accepted in other fora, such as the ICPD.
Switzerland, opposed by Benin, suggested that paragraph 9(a)
(implementing policies) should also refer to sectoral
policies. The EU proposed paragraph 9(a) bis, calling for
favorable trade policies to facilitate job creation, for
human resource development, and for democratic institutions
and good governance. Switzerland introduced a paragraph 9(b)
bis, encouraging private investments. The G-77 and China
suggested that the text should focus on the poor and
disadvantaged. The US suggested that 9(d) (international
monetary coordination) be replaced with language on
providing stability in financial markets. The G-77 added a
new 9(g) on the sustainable development of small island
developing States. PARAGRAPH 10: (even distribution of
global growth) The G-77 and China said that global economic
growth should be equitably distributed. The EU preferred the
original wording. The EU, supported by the US, Japan and
Norway, preferred a call for debt reduction rather than
elimination. PARAGRAPH 10(b): (expanding and improving
assistance) Canada called for reprioritizing development
flows. The G-77 and China proposed a 10(b) bis, noting the
unsustainable consumption patterns of the wealthy in all
nations, especially the industrialized nations.
PARAGRAPH 11: (priority countries) The EU proposed an
additional subparagraph regarding national policies. The G-
77 and China preferred the original text. In 11(b) (external
debt), the G-77 and China called for development-oriented
solutions that are equitable, effective, and comprehensive.
The EU and Japan had difficulty with references to debt
cancellation. The G-77 and China added 11(c) bis, drawing
attention to the negative effects of the Uruguay Round. The
EU objected. In 11(d) (increased ODA), the EU favored a
formulation increasing the impact of ODA. Norway suggested
allocating a larger share to social development goals.
PARAGRAPH 12(a): (open market opportunities) The G-77 and
China, backed by Ethiopia, said that measures to open market
opportunities should be implemented, especially for the
poor. Norway suggested a new 12(b) bis on adopting and
implementing policies to ensure equitable distribution of
the benefits of growth. In 12(d) (access to technology) the
Holy See stressed the importance of knowledge and access to
it. The US proposed that access be promoted on mutually
acceptable terms. The G-77 and China proposed a paragraph
12(d) bis encouraging transnational corporations to consider
the social and cultural impacts of their activities. The EU
suggested a new 12(f) bis to call for the safe interplay of
small economies with larger ones. PARAGRAPH 13: (fiscal
systems) The US and Japan expressed reservations on the
entire paragraph. The EU stressed the need for more neutral
terms rather than value-loaded terms. In 13(d) (accumulation
of wealth), the G-77 and China suggested reference to the
use of appropriate taxation. In 13(e) (subsidies), Canada
called for examining the necessity in addition to the
distribution of subsidies. In 13(f) (international tax
agreements), the G-77 and China called for deletion of the
reference to countries with economies in transition. The
Russian Federation and the Ukraine objected to this
deletion.
THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY
WORKING GROUP I: The working group will continue its first
reading of the Declaration, starting with Part I B
Principles and Goals.
WORKING GROUP II: The Secretariat's compilation of all
amendments should be ready this morning. The working group
may begin negotiations on Paragraph 1 this morning, but
might elect for regional group consultations.
EU EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION WITH NGOS: 6-7 pm in Conference
Room 5.
UNRISD SUMMARY SESSION: UNRISD will hold a summary session
on the results of its Seminar on Economic Restructuring and
Social Policy at 2:45 pm in Conference Room 3.
This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (c)
is written and edited by Johannah
Bernstein , Anilla Cherian
, Langston James Goree VI
"Kimo" , Richard Jordan
and Lynn Wagner
. General funding for the Bulletin
has been provided by the International Institute for
Sustainable Development (iisd@web.apc.org), the Government
of Denmark and the Pew Charitable Trusts through the Pew
Global Stewardship Initiative.Funding for this volume of the
Bulletin has been provided by CIDA, UNDP and the Government
of the Netherlands. The authors can be contacted at their
electronic mail addresses and by phone and fax at +1-212-
888-2737. IISD can be contacted by phone at +1-204-958-7700,
by fax at +1-204-958-7710. The opinions expressed in Earth
Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the views of IISD and other funders.
Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used
in other publications with appropriate citation. Electronic
versions of the Bulletin can be found on the gopher at
and in searchable hyptertext through
the Linkages WWW-server at
on the Internet. This volume of the Bulletin is uploaded
into the APC conferences and .
The Earth Negotiations Bulletin may not be reproduced,
reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the
APC networks and the ENB listserver, without specific
permission from the International Institute for Sustainable
Development. This limitation includes distribution via
Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print
media and broadcast. For more information, send a message to
.